About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 89 (615 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

San Francisco 16, Us 8, Susan King 2, Madras 2, California 2, Sfpd 1, Bridget Smith 1, Mta 1, Sfmta 1, Lesley 1, Looking 1, Burt Hill 1, The City 1, Livable City 1, City 1, Chu 1, Leslie Couch 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    September 25, 2010
    3:30 - 4:00am PDT  

3:30am
3:31am
3:32am
chairperson mar: good morning, everyone. welcome to the meeting of the audit and oversight committee of the board of supervisors. to my left is supervisor ma xwell, and soon will be joined by supervisor chu. >> please be sure to turn off any cellular phones or pagers. items discussed -- item submitted today will appear on the october 15 meeting. chairperson mar: please call item one. >> an ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code, chapter 10, by amending section
3:33am
10 to change the gift fund category for the animal care and control welfare fund to authorize the department of animal care and control to accept gifts of cash, equipment, property, and services not to exceed $50,000. >> i am the director of san francisco animal care and control. this item came up when we received a request to the department -- a bequest to the department as part of the settlement of an estate. excepting it ended up a lot harder than i realized -- accepting it ended up a lot harder than i realized it would be. we were not properly designated for donations. we asked for a change to the fund designation, and while at
3:34am
it it was suggested perhaps it wanted to have this ability to accept gifts of either money or materials up to $50,000. it is rare that we get anything close to that, but it would help. we generally use those monies to pay for any kind of animal welfare needs that we have. in these tight budget times, we have seen a lot more animals coming in to the shelter with a lot more needs, especially veterinary needs. or materials and supplies have been running really high. we generally take money from those donations to offset the medical care of the animals. that is the background on how it came up. i am happy to answer any other questions you have. chairperson mar: sure. hopefully this leads to more big
3:35am
donations to panel welfare. >> i would not mind. we can use it. chairperson mar: let us open this up to public comment. is there anyone from the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. it is moved and seconded without objection. please call item two. >> item 2, hearing on the recently published 2009-2010 civil grand jury report entitled "sharing the roadway -- from confrontation to conversation." chairperson mar: this is an item based on a 2009-2010 civil grand jury report. we have a number of speakers and presenters here on this item and we have a number of findings that we at the board have to respond to, and recommendations as well. we have a great set of people that will be testifying about the five years of hard work for
3:36am
the san francisco bike plan, and the suggestions and insights of the grand jury findings. before introducing the civil grand jury foreperson, and wanted to say that with the san francisco mta sustainable streets group, we just met from the traffic department, someone from the mayor's office, the chair of the bicycle advisory committee, and people from the budget analyst's office, who have helped us looking at the findings and recommendations in the chart and giving suggestions to us as well. from the community side, we have members of the san francisco bicycle coalition.
3:37am
i want to introduce lizzie of the civil grand jury foreperson. >> good morning, chair mar. i am leslie couch. i was chairperson of the 2009-to this and 10 grand jury. -- 2009-2010 grand jury. this is our last report this year. the civil grand jury brings to the city issues that threaten successful implementation of the san francisco bicycle plan. its findings and recommendations are designed to encourage the city to educate residents about sharing the roadways, to increase police enforcement and safety. chairperson mar: can i quickly jump in? i forgot to call item 3, which is connected to item two. could you also call item three?
3:38am
>> 8 resolution responding to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations contained in the civil grand jury report. chairperson mar: thank you. pardon my jumping in. please continue. >> this brings to the attention of the city issues among motorists, cyclists, and others. its findings are designed to educate the city residents about sharing the roadway, to increase police enforcement, to improve safety, and to open the discussion about fairness and equity. we focused on issues of education and enforcement. the actions in corporate and always abroad where use have an impact on the plans. motorists and cyclists must come
3:39am
to a greater understanding of each other's responsibilities as they share the byways of san francisco. the san francisco bicycle plant strives to make bicycling a regular part of daily life in san francisco. the civil grand jury looked at how they could safely share the rise without conflict. i would like to introduce the code-share of the committee. that is the brief summary of findings and recommendations. -- i would like to introduce the co-chair of the committee. >> it is a pleasure to be here and an honor to have served on the jury and to speak to you today. i would like to highlight a little bit more on the three topics lesley presented.
3:40am
education is an important and useful tool to bridge the mistrust, misunderstanding, and misperceptions that motorists and cyclists have of each other and shift toward an improved core existence on the streets. safety and mutual respect are key topics to address. it can be delivered in a positive fashion to a broad range of media formats. availability of six cycling materials is extensive, yet a systematic distribution to non- cyclists, motorists, and police becomes an issue. it is important to develop a comprehensive program to distribute to the public as well as cyclists the extensive available safe cycling education materials. police training materials are
3:41am
out of date and not very relevant. police involvement is critical. police should update training materials related to bicycles in a joint effort with the bicycling community. cyclists may also not be aware of the advantages and availability of health insurance coverage for cyclists. under enforcement, enforcement of traffic codes is seen by many in cycling as critical to raise the level of safety and thereby encourage more travelers to opt for bicycle use. the san francisco police department must play an active role in this. enforcement of the traffic code and california vehicle code is seen by the jury to be often lax. the other motorists nor cyclist's receive many moving violation citations. police officers on average ticket a bicyclist maybe once a
3:42am
year and ticket a motorist about every third day. traffic data indicates that in 2009, 2004 thought -- 2004 hundred 93 were -- that in 2009, less than 1% were issued to cyclists. police are reluctant to cite cyclists. members of the police department have shared their frustration regarding the mixed messages the receiver during ticket enforcement, and the lack of support they receive from the community. -- and they receive -- mixed messages they received during to the enforcement, and the lack of support they receive from the community. the police cite the power of the
3:43am
bicycle community and the power they are perceived to wield. there should be an overall city- wide policy about how the existing california vehicle code and the city and county traffic codes will be implemented so police have the direction and support they seek and deserve. the bicycle community for the most part desires consistent and effective police enforcement. prior to increasing enforcement, the campaign to publicize this increased enforcement is critical to the successful implementation, and help make the city streets safer for all street users, including bicyclist, pedestrians, and motorists. motorists and cyclists need to step up to the plate. san francisco does not require licensing of bicycles for cyclists.
3:44am
administering the program would be expensive, and enforcement would be challenging. there is no bicycle traffic school, traffic court, or fix it ticket options available for cyclists. the bicycle traffic court or school and a fix it ticket program would provide an opportunity for bicycle education, which will increase safety for all. equity is defined as perceived fairness. it is essential to the successful formation of bicycle policy. the bicycle community views itself as engaging in a low- impact activity, that cycling should be encouraged, and that any further financial contribution would act as a deterrent, and that cyclists pay their fair share through state and local taxes. while it is difficult to provide exact numbers to the court or deny this claim, it is found that some fees associated with suckling should be considered.
3:45am
some contribution, even a nominal amount, might reduce the tension between motorists and cyclists. the primary objective of the transit first policy is the safe, efficient movement of people and goods. the transit first policy does not require one mode of transportation, such as automobile or transit, to financially support all costs associated with road usage. san francisco should be careful not to pit one group against another. the transit first policy does not preclude bicyclist from contributing to the cost of sharing the road. the jury urges the board of supervisors to require further analysis of this recommendation for the equity issue. the bicycle advisory committee states, "the factual basis of comparison could go a long way to dispelling commonly-held
3:46am
myths about funding and subsidies to transportation modes, benefiting users of public transportation, cyclists, pedestrians, commercial interests, and individual motorists." a factual basis of comparison could begin the conversation. thank you for your time. chairperson mar: thank you so much both of you. think the whole civil grand jury for their hard work. -- and think the whole -- thank the whole civil grand jury for their hard work. but for public comment, i want to speak some -- speak to some of the -- before public comment, i want to speak to some of the committees that contributed to the grand jury findings. i want to ask if any of the department heads from the anti-
3:47am
gay -- from the mta, from the mayor's office, from the bicycle advisory committee -- if you would like to come up and give some brief remarks. from the mayor's office. >> thank you. i want to thank the civil grand jury for their hard work on this report. i will speak briefly on the mayor's office position before and handed over to the -- before i hand it over to the mta and police department. the bicycle plan is important and we need to provide for the safety of the roadways for bicyclist, pedestrians, and motor vehicle users. the one thing that you will see in our response to the board is our disagreement with any
3:48am
alterations to the bicycle plan. many in this room are aware the bicycle plan is a document that we have been working hard on. we do understand that there is areas for some improvement, but as the mta will show, the action plans in the actual report do provide for some guidance on the recommendations the civil grand jury asked for. in terms of the three things the civil grand jury pointed to on the education, enforcement, and equity, the mayor's office has agreed there are areas of improvement that can happen for educational materials. there are things the mta does provide for educational outreach to the public, but there is not at this moment targeted out reached by the sfpd -- targeted
3:49am
out reareach by the sfpd. to the extent that the police department and m.t.a. are working to make sure the rules we have in place are being enforced in the community. finally, in terms of equity, we will look at this idea of- registration as something reject this idea of -- we will look at this idea of negative registration. >> bridget smith. i am with the sfmta. we want to think the grand jury for highlighting these important issues. we have been working on projects to improve bicycling and other
3:50am
street projects. i cannot emphasize enough that the bike plan was recently adopted and to make changes at this early time in the process would be difficult. i think a lot of the recommendations we have gotten from the civil grand jury can be addressed in the current bike plan. we can go over that point by point if you like, or we can leave it at that for now and respond to questions later about how we believe we can address a lot of our portion to the bike plan that exists. chairperson mar: i think after public comment more of a back and forth at that time. >> thank you for inviting us to keep the continuing discussion going on. chairperson mar: thank you. >> i am the captain with the traffic company. we responded with a letter to
3:51am
the presiding judge with a response on each one of the items. we would be glad to take any questions and answers. chairperson mar: thank you for being here. burt hill, chair of the san francisco advisory committee. >> thank you. i want to commend the civil grand jury first of all for the hard work they did. the work a very long time and got into analysis of the laws. we appreciate very much the work they did. rather than going through it before the q and a, i would like to cover a few highlights. if nothing else, this grand jury report focused on education, extremely important education, on the part of the police department, the bicycle community, and motorists. i hope that is understood to this. that is one area that is pretty much lacking, i think, all the way around.
3:52am
the other thing is a want to talk about the importance of the ticket program. we have had meetings back and forth and it has not gone anywhere. we need to move this forward. one other comment i want to make specifically is the area of judgment. one thing we need to have within the police is something like the equivalent of the highway code already book, where there is interpretation of the laws with regard to bicycle cetaceans. -- the equivalent of the highway code ready book. in san francisco, it is the official position but that bicycles can ride outside designated areas. it would help to know things about yield and right of way. i would be happy to answer any further questions. chairperson mar: thank you.
3:53am
i know that supervisor chu and i have receive significant support from the budget analysts office. do you have any framing for how we're going to proceed with this process? thank you. any questions? let us open this up for public comment. i want to call up members of the san francisco bicycle coalition. thank you for your great advocacy and work for better bicycling and sharing the roads in san francisco. >> thank you for having us up to
3:54am
speak. i will speak for both of us. i just wanted to say first of all that i commend the city on its great work on the bike plan, and the grand jury in really looking at the bike plan and highlighting some of the issues that are very important to us as well in the bike plan. outreach, education, and enforcement are incredibly important. we have been incredibly fortunate to collaborate with the mta on some very great bicycle education classes. in fact, burt hill, who was here, is an amazing educator for people here in san francisco. and we are able to offer regular bicycle education classes that have really helped to make the streets safer for everyone. also, i think the enforcement
3:55am
peace is very important, and particularly our interest is in highlighting enforcement where it is going to help make the streets safer for everyone and where we can do that. that is something we are very much behind. the bike plan as adopted really contains all of the important items that were highlighted in the grand jury report. we would love to see those go forward through some kind of action plan that is really separate from any sort of revision to the bike plan. the by plan as it stands is really giving us everything we need to direct us -- the bike plan as it stands is really giving everything we need to direct us in the next few years. today, we need to come up with some action plan separate from the bike plan for these education and enforcement items. chairperson mar: thanks a lot. if you would like to speak,
3:56am
please come forward. i see susan king up from livable city and others as well. please come forward if you would like to speak. >> good morning. i am the district to representative on the bicycle advisory committee. -- the district two representative on the bicycle advisory committee. anything that happens with bicycles has to come from the assumption that they are good for the city, good for the environment, good for health, and good for motorists. think if every bicycle was a car. there would be a lot more congestion in the city. given that, i would like to say two things. one is that i think the equity issue is not very important. i get a lot of complaints from motorists about bicyclist. i never hear anything about bicyclist not doing their fair
3:57am
share, -- about bicyclists not doing their fair share. i think there were a number of important issues regarding education and enforcement. of them, i think by far the most important is to prioritize the type of enforcement that is really required to make the city streets safer for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. i think it is somewhat unfortunate that cbc does not treat blacklists -- does not treat bicyclist differently than other vehicles. they are very different. other than that, i think it is important for the bicycle community and the police department to sit down and really go over what enforcement and safety issues are really important for the health and safety of the city. thanks very much. chairperson mar: thank you for
3:58am
your work on the advisory committee as well. >> thank you for the introduction. i am susan king. i am with livable city and the district 5 representative on the bicycle advisory committee. i serve with burt and richard. i think the point has been made, a couple points. first, thank you to the grand jury for your tremendous work. there was a lot of time and thought put into this and it really was necessary and you guys did a great job, so thank you. the biggest issue i had in these findings, and i was one of three members of the bicycle advisory committee who did not fully agree with the bac report -- there was a footnote regarding enforcement. i think the point has been made that enforcement of all traffic laws as applied is 81 size fits
3:59am
all, -- itis a one-size-fits- all and does not recognize the difference in the way cyclists use the road from madras. people were given a citation for rolling to a stop sign at an intersection that was empty. -- rolling through a stop sign at an intersection that was empty. if there is no clear direction on what kinds of cyclist behavior should be targeted and what kinds of madras behavior should be targeted, you're going to continue -- what kinds of motorist behavior should be targeted, you are going to continue to seek a slap- enforcement of things that do not pose a continuing danger. particularly around the fact that in order to come to a full and complete stop on a bicycle often will slow the entire inrs